The general thread here is about AI helping with a more proactive approach to medicine. Screening for high risk populations certainly falls under that.
You certainly said that screening leads to over diagnosis.
I think for screening, the best results are probably the upcoming prospective study from Kheiron.
https://www.kheironmed.com/news/press-release-new-results-sh...
I suspect, btw, that the Google model in this paper https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1799-6
will show stronger performance. But Kheiron appears to be ahead as far as proving the value of the tool since they have actually validated prospectively.
Broad-based population screenings as the parent comment suggests, in my opinion, are.
I'm yet to see any clinically-valid distinguishing aspects that would suggest AI would add value to screening. Curious to hear evidence that drives your optimism of human+AI.
Just to state, the NELSON study [1] focuses on high-risk segments. Their paper also recommends a "personalized risk-based approach" to screening. This seems reasonable.
[1] https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa1911793